Speaker of the People’s Assembly, Mohammad Jihad al-Laham, announced that the Assembly received a notification from the Supreme Constitutional Court stating that Mr Bashar Hafez al-Assad. . .submitted an application on April 28th, 2014 for presidential candidacy and he also submitted the required documents according to article 21 of the Supreme Constitutional Court’s law.

Speaker al-Laham pointed out the People’s Assembly received a letter from Dr al-Assad announcing submitting a presidential candidacy application along with the required documents.

Al-Laham added that Dr al-Assad asked [that members of the Peoples Assembly be informed] of his candidacy application, wishing to win their written support.

BIOGRAPHY OF DR. BASHAR HAFEZ AL-ASSAD:

• Born on 11 September 1965 in Damascus to Hafez al-Assad and Aniseh Makhlouf.

• Attended Laique School in Damascus before moving to the Frere School where he completed his high school education in 1982.

• He joined the Baath Party in 1979.

• He studied medicine in Damascus University and graduated in 1988.

• During his third year at university he joined the Armed Forces.

• After qualifying as a doctor, he specialized in Ophthalmology and trained in Tishreen Military Hospital.

• From 1992-1994 he continued his specialist training in the renowned Western Eye Hospital in London.

• When he returned from the UK he joined the Military Academy to continue his military training.

• In addition to his military and medical commitments, he presided over the Syrian Computer Society from 1996-2000 and played an instrumental role in advancing the use of technology throughout the country, most notably the introduction of the Internet and free access to ICT training.

• He was elected President of the Syrian Arab Republic in July 2000 and was re-elected to a second term in May 2007.

• He married Asma Akhras in December 2001. They have three children: Hafez, Zein and Karim.

Our defence industry cooperation with our Ukrainian partners is very important for Russia’s defence sector, but it is of absolutely crucial importance for Ukraine’s defence industry.

The difference between the two countries is that Russia and its defence industry have the financial resources and technological level to find replacements for what we currently import. This would require some time and additional money.

How much time would it take? Depending on the types of goods, it would take from 1.5 to 2.5 years. We already have a rough idea of the costs involved and strange though it may seem, they are not so big and the budget would be able to support them. In these circumstances we would probably have to adjust the state defence procurement orders to the right a little, as the financial specialists say, but this would not be by much.

We will not revise the state defence procurement orders, such revision would not be needed, but some money could be freed up, including money from the Government reserves, which are sufficient for covering Crimea’s current problems and for these purposes too.

Breaking ties with Russian partners would have a devastating effect on Ukraine’s defence industry though. The reason for this is that they have no other sales market. The Russian armed forces are their only customer. This situation is inevitable because the aircraft engines that we buy and install in planes and helicopters we operate are not used in other countries and are simply unneeded elsewhere except as scrap metal.

It would take us some time to develop replacements for engines for naval vessels, especially some types of power equipment for diesel-fuelled submarines and for ships, but the Nikolayevsk Plant would end up in a very tough situation, with no buyer for their goods.

We hope that things won’t reach the point where these cooperation ties get broken, although we see today that deliveries are not being made in full, and the relevant government agencies there want to halt supplies. In any event, we are already working on this matter. I have instructed the Government and they are actively looking into this whole question of replacing imports now.

I am sure that the decision to delay supplies and deliveries was not taken by our partners at the factories. They are well aware of what situation the government is putting them in. I am sure that they wish to continue their cooperation with us, but I do not know how events will actually develop. I think —-and want to draw to your attention—- that this is linked to the idea we have been hearing more and more often from our Western partners about imposing sanctions on some Russian economic sectors, the defence sector above all.

I think this is an attempt to stop us from finding replacements for these imports and leaving us dependent on other companies, including the plants in Ukraine. This is an attack using low means. But we will achieve our goals regardless. You cannot stop this process in the modern world. Yes, we do need to buy some types of equipment and machine tools from our partners, but they all need to realise that we will find suitable replacements.

There are unique goods produced by only one or two plants, but even there we will find replacements. It is just a matter of time and money. It will be a bit more expensive and take a little longer, but we will survive and will continue, whereas our partners will not have this chance. Such is the logic of today’s life and reality. But of course we would like to continue our cooperation.

On the question of Ukrainian specialists possibly moving to Russia, if they want to, we would help them settle in here and they would receive decent wages and housing, flats. You will get the needed money from the federal budget for this.

I must say that this is already happening, and more than one family, more than one specialist, has already made the move. Of course we are talking here of people who can work at our defence industry companies and whose skills are in demand there. Ukraine has excellent potential in this respect, excellent specialists. We welcome them and would be happy to see them working in Russia in our companies.

. . .under the new measure, currently under consideration by the Cabinet, civic groups risk losing their licenses if they engage in activities other than those officially declared to local authorities.